Accused rapist is fortunate that CCTV tells a different story

[Loren Pechtel]

The rape apologists are the ones engaging in hysteria.

If it weren't for the camera this would have been yet another false rape charge that wrecked a guy's life.

You don't know that. The victim recanted.

And the police weren't listening to the recanting.

- - - Updated - - -

No, those who exaggerate the problem of rape and want burden of proof to be lowered (or even reversed) in cases of rape are the ones engaging in hysteria.

You don't know that. The victim recanted.

And yet you still call her "the victim". Why?

There's no question she's a victim of an injury. The issue is the origin of her harm.

 

[laughing dog]

The rape apologists are the ones engaging in hysteria.
You don't know that. The victim recanted.

And the police weren't listening to the recanting.

Are you under the impression that meant this man would be automatically sent to prison?

 

[Toni]

And that's the problem with the recent rape hysteria. Rape is assumed even without any evidence that a rape took place.

Sure: drunken, confused victim with injuries and vague recollections of sex. Sounds like consensual sexual contact to most people. you because, well, you.

Many rape victims withdraw their complaint or attempt to do so because they don't want to go through all of the ugliness that an investigation and trial will involve, in addition to dealing with the trauma of the rape.

And many accusers withdraw their complaint or attempt to do so because no rape took place. Like in this case.

You have no idea whether or not that's true. None.

Which would explain why the police insisted on moving forward with charges in the face of the victim's withdrawal of complaint.

Yeah, who needs evidence when we have ideological certainty that it must have been rape.

Right: Drunken, confused person with a variety of injuries consistent with a struggle and vague recollections of sex sounds like... definitely consensual sex.

What is not known is if this incident was an isolated incident, or if there has been a rash of sexual assaults or if the accused man has been a suspect in other assaults. We have zero idea, but if any of these were going on, it would make sense that the police would want to proceed with charges.

Nonsense. It makes no sense to proceed when you have no evidence.

I will regret asking this but what would you consider evidence? Four male witnesses?

The employer, oh, so helpfully had video that the sex was consensual. It did not have any BAC evidence. We have no idea if she was too drunk to consent by US standards or by the standards of Cambodia. It isn't just US college campuses that regard 'too drunk to consent' sex as rape. But not all countries have the same laws.

Too drunk to consent != merely drunk, except on many US college campuses, but only for female students. Male students are presumed to be able to consent when drunk.

Your hobby horse has been dead now for quite some time.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sure: drunken, confused victim with injuries and vague recollections of sex. Sounds like consensual sexual contact to most people. you because, well, you.

The point is that she had no recollections of rape. The evidence doesn't exist to show it was rape beyond a reasonable doubt, no case should be brought.


You realize you're basically defending a rape report that has conclusively been proven to be false?

 

[Derec]

Sure: drunken, confused victim with injuries and vague recollections of sex. Sounds like consensual sexual contact to most people. you because, well, you.

The injuries were shown to not be related to the sex. As far as being drunk and not remembering the sex too well, if he was in the same condition would that mean she raped him as well? If two drunk people hook up and both have only vague recollection of what happened, are they both rapists or only the guy?

You have no idea whether or not that's true. None.

Except that there is CCTV video.

Right: Drunken, confused person with a variety of injuries consistent with a struggle and vague recollections of sex sounds like... definitely consensual sex.

They may be "consistent with" a struggle but they have also been shown to be accidental and self inflicted, i.e. to have nothing to do with the sex the woman had. "Consistent with" is really a very low standard.

I will regret asking this but what would you consider evidence?

What would you consider evidence that no rape took place?

Your hobby horse has been dead now for quite some time.

The Obama-Biden policy has not been rescinded and the California ridiculous affirmative consent law has not been repealed so, no, that horse ain't dead yet and needs plenty of more beating.

 

[laughing dog]

You realize you're basically defending a rape report that has conclusively been proven to be false?

No, Toni is making the argument that the conclusion that her friends drew was reasonable given the information at the time it occurred. You know, it is exactly the same argument you make whenever a police officer kills a unarmed person with no intent to harm him or her.

 

[laughing dog]

The injuries were shown to not be related to the sex.

Yes, after the fact of the complaint, not beforehand. They drew their conclusion with the evidence at the time.

The Obama-Biden policy has not been rescinded and the California ridiculous affirmative consent law has not been repealed so, no, that horse ain't dead yet and needs plenty of more beating.

Rape hysteria
Rape hysteria
Rape hysteria

 

[TSwizzle]

No, Toni is making the argument that the conclusion that her friends drew was reasonable given the information at the time it occurred.

If one assumes all sexual encounters are rape, then yes, I suppose that would be a reasonable conclusion.


It's almost like there is disappointment that the girl wasn't actually raped.

 

[laughing dog]

No, Toni is making the argument that the conclusion that her friends drew was reasonable given the information at the time it occurred.

If one assumes all sexual encounters are rape, then yes, I suppose that would be a reasonable conclusion.

I guess we live in a different world, because in my experience it is highly unusual for someone to have multiple serious injuries after a consensual sex.

It's almost like there is disappointment that the girl wasn't actually raped.

That is a very sick straw man on a number of levels.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If one assumes all sexual encounters are rape, then yes, I suppose that would be a reasonable conclusion.

I guess we live in a different world, because in my experience it is highly unusual for someone to have multiple serious injuries after a consensual sex.

She didn't sustain those injuries during sex, but rather in a drunken fall. Drunks falling and getting hurt isn't exactly highly unusual.

 

[Toni]

No, Toni is making the argument that the conclusion that her friends drew was reasonable given the information at the time it occurred.

If one assumes all sexual encounters are rape, then yes, I suppose that would be a reasonable conclusion.


It's almost like there is disappointment that the girl wasn't actually raped.

I certainly don't regard all sex as rape. In fact, I regard rape as sexual assault, not sex.

It was certainly extremely reasonable for the friends who saw their friend drunk, confused and with multiple injuries that could easily be consistent with sexual assault who had just come back from a 'walk' on the beach with some guy to think their frien had been assaulted. In fact, it is the most obvious conclusion unless she returned in some affectionate manner with her partner.

We have only the word of the newspaper that the not disinterested video from the hotel exonerated the guy.

 

[laughing dog]

I guess we live in a different world, because in my experience it is highly unusual for someone to have multiple serious injuries after a consensual sex.

She didn't sustain those injuries during sex, but rather in a drunken fall. Drunks falling and getting hurt isn't exactly highly unusual.

Please pay attention - the discussion was about the reasonableness of the reaction of the friends. That did not know her injuries were from a fall at the time.

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

Too drunk to consent != merely drunk, except on many US college campuses, but only for female students. Male students are presumed to be able to consent when drunk.

This is an interesting area right now, but one where tort lawyers and the falsely accused are going to begin making money.

School administrations are ill-equipped to deal with the intricacies of evidence rules and Constitutional rights when it comes to criminal acts, yet they make decisions as if they are. It's interesting in that they would turn over a murder case to the police, but not a reported rape. And in the meantime, they'll suspend or in some cases expel a student based on a mere accusation before a finding of fact is ever conducted.

Of course there are cut and dried cases of rape where the such action is appropriate. But in the many controversial cases that occur, schools attempt to exercise jurisdiction and remedial measures they don't have over matters they're not qualified to handle. Strange.

 

[Toni]

Too drunk to consent != merely drunk, except on many US college campuses, but only for female students. Male students are presumed to be able to consent when drunk.

This is an interesting area right now, but one where tort lawyers and the falsely accused are going to begin making money.

School administrations are ill-equipped to deal with the intricacies of evidence rules and Constitutional rights when it comes to criminal acts, yet they make decisions as if they are. It's interesting in that they would turn over a murder case to the police, but not a reported rape. And in the meantime, they'll suspend or in some cases expel a student based on a mere accusation before a finding of fact is ever conducted.

Of course there are cut and dried cases of rape where the such action is appropriate. But in the many controversial cases that occur, schools attempt to exercise jurisdiction and remedial measures they don't have over matters they're not qualified to handle. Strange.

You seem to be confusing university code of conduct cases with criminal cases. As happens a lot with some posters on this board.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is an interesting area right now, but one where tort lawyers and the falsely accused are going to begin making money.

School administrations are ill-equipped to deal with the intricacies of evidence rules and Constitutional rights when it comes to criminal acts, yet they make decisions as if they are. It's interesting in that they would turn over a murder case to the police, but not a reported rape. And in the meantime, they'll suspend or in some cases expel a student based on a mere accusation before a finding of fact is ever conducted.

Of course there are cut and dried cases of rape where the such action is appropriate. But in the many controversial cases that occur, schools attempt to exercise jurisdiction and remedial measures they don't have over matters they're not qualified to handle. Strange.

You seem to be confusing university code of conduct cases with criminal cases. As happens a lot with some posters on this board.

Because you see the university code of conduct as a means of punishing men that had sex you don't agree with even though the courts don't think a crime was committed.

 

[Toni]

You seem to be confusing university code of conduct cases with criminal cases. As happens a lot with some posters on this board.

Because you see the university code of conduct as a means of punishing men that had sex you don't agree with even though the courts don't think a crime was committed.

First of all, Loren, you don't know how I see any university code of conduct. Pretending that you do and foisting your invented mumbojumbo onto me is not productive and makes you look foolish.

I've noticed that you have a pattern, usually taken with women with whom you disagree and that is to turn things onto them, in a personal way. You've stopped vaguely alluding to my gender as making me too emotional or otherwise unfit for rational discussion because I've called you out on it. Now you are foisting some characteristics that fit your conception of how somehow repressed and misandrist and of all things, authoritarian! I must be because I disagree with you. You invent some half assed sketch of the person I am and try to divert us from recognizing that you simply cannot actually make a good argument because I have pointed out, for perhaps the 100th time on this board, that university student code of conduct and discipline is not on the same level as criminal law, and should not be regarded as such.

That little trick you like to try, my friend, is known as weak sauce.

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

This is an interesting area right now, but one where tort lawyers and the falsely accused are going to begin making money.

School administrations are ill-equipped to deal with the intricacies of evidence rules and Constitutional rights when it comes to criminal acts, yet they make decisions as if they are. It's interesting in that they would turn over a murder case to the police, but not a reported rape. And in the meantime, they'll suspend or in some cases expel a student based on a mere accusation before a finding of fact is ever conducted.

Of course there are cut and dried cases of rape where the such action is appropriate. But in the many controversial cases that occur, schools attempt to exercise jurisdiction and remedial measures they don't have over matters they're not qualified to handle. Strange.

You seem to be confusing university code of conduct cases with criminal cases. As happens a lot with some posters on this board.

You don't seem to understand that an accusation of rape is a criminal matter and that when a criminal accusation is made, one has the right to counsel, to confront witnesses, and present their own. Yet a school can expel a student based on nothing more than an accusation. Rather than calling the police, who are qualified to handle the matter and then letting events run their course through the court system, universities run roughshod over the rights of students when quite often the accusations are false. Yet the falsely accused has been tossed and has to live with the consequences as if he had committed a crime when in fact he hasn't.

The list of violations included in that list in long. Whatever code of conduct any given university has, it is meaningless when it comes to real criminal matters of accusation, due process, equal protection, and punishment.

 

[Toni]

You seem to be confusing university code of conduct cases with criminal cases. As happens a lot with some posters on this board.

You don't seem to understand that an accusation of rape is a criminal matter and that when a criminal accusation is made, one has the right to counsel, to confront witnesses, and present their own. Yet a school can expel a student based on nothing more than an accusation. Rather than calling the police, who are qualified to handle the matter and then letting events run their course through the court system, universities run roughshod over the rights of students when quite often the accusations are false. Yet the falsely accused has been tossed and has to live with the consequences as if he had committed a crime when in fact he hasn't.

The list of violations included in that list in long. Whatever code of conduct any given university has, it is meaningless when it comes to real criminal matters of accusation, due process, equal protection, and punishment.

FWIW, I completely agree that rape charges should be pursued through real law enforcement. Universities discourage this because they don't want the publicity. Nobody wants to send their kid to a school where they believe their kid might be raped.

There are other issues, though. Suppose the police are slow to make an arrest and the attacker lives in your dorm and is in your chemistry lab? How do schools adequately support victims who must deal with seeing their attacker every day? Moreover, universities also have separate codes of conduct, recognizing the unique situation of a university. Students may be disciplined for under aged drinking or for plagiarism, for example. Moreover students are very young adults who don't have full adult legal status and who don't have fully adult brains. They are often in their first prolonged experience away from parental control and have their first taste of controlling their own lives. They are thrust into close quarters with strangers who may have very different ideas and habits. Which is part of the point. But it makes them very vulnerable in some ways. The university has a responsibility to provide a safe learning environment. It might not be a criminal offense for a guy or a group of guys to target a girl and call her a slut, etc, but it is certainly can create a hostile learning environment for that girl and for any others who know about the situation.

Universities have a student code of conduct in response to the realities of dealing with 18-22 year olds and also in response to their obligation to provide a safe and conducive learning environment.

 

[Nexus]

It might not be a criminal offense for a guy or a group of guys to target a girl and call her a slut, etc, but it is certainly can create a hostile learning environment for that girl and for any others who know about the situation.

A false rape accusation creates a hostile learning environment for the men wrongly accused. And you wish to exacerbate that harm by justifying university policies in favor of alleged victims.

 

[Derec]

There are other issues, though. Suppose the police are slow to make an arrest and the attacker lives in your dorm and is in your chemistry lab?

Alleged attacker. Perhaps there is no arrest because there is not enough evidence to even arrest somebody. How then can a college say that there is enough evidence for them to find the male student guilty and expel him?

How do schools adequately support victims who must deal with seeing their attacker every day?

The university does not have adequate resources to judge whether the accuser is really a "victim" or the accused an "attacker". What you want is a presumption of guilt./

Moreover, universities also have separate codes of conduct, recognizing the unique situation of a university. Students may be disciplined for under aged drinking or for plagiarism, for example.

And you think that makes it ok for universities to expel male students for consensual sex if the female regrets the sex afterwards (up to a year afterwards like in the case of the false Vasser accuser) or had anything to drink, even if the accused was also drinking and was even drunker than the accuser (like for example in the Amherst false rape case)?

Moreover students are very young adults who don't have full adult legal status and who don't have fully adult brains. They are often in their first prolonged experience away from parental control and have their first taste of controlling their own lives.

That doesn't mean the universities should run roughshod over due process rights of accused male students. Neither does it mean that universities should treat their male and female students differently (i.e. drunk female == rape victim, drunk male == rapist).

They are thrust into close quarters with strangers who may have very different ideas and habits. Which is part of the point. But it makes them very vulnerable in some ways. The university has a responsibility to provide a safe learning environment.

For both male and female students. Male students should not be in constant danger over being punished because a female filed a false rape allegation against them.

It might not be a criminal offense for a guy or a group of guys to target a girl and call her a slut, etc, but it is certainly can create a hostile learning environment for that girl and for any others who know about the situation.

What does calling somebody names (which happens both ways btw) have to do with rape allegations?

Universities have a student code of conduct in response to the realities of dealing with 18-22 year olds and also in response to their obligation to provide a safe and conducive learning environment.

That does not justify expelling innocent male students.